Why is the Volume Distribution of Charge Described Differently in the Book?

Ripperbat
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A rod of dielectric material is spun about it's axis with angular velocity \omega. A uniform magnetic field B exists in a direction along the axis of the bar. Determine a charge distribution which produces the same electric field as does the rotating rod. The electric susceptibility of the material is xE

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



The force on a charge q at a distance r is F=q*\omega*r*B and the electric field is E=r*B*\omega.
The polarization of the rod at distance r is P=xE*\epsilon0*\omega*B*r.
So the volume distribution of charge should be -div P = -(\partialPr) / (\partial*r). But according to the book it should be
-div P = -(\partialPr) / (\partial*r) - (Pr) / r .


Could somebody please explain why it should be that way?? thx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ripperbat said:
So the volume distribution of charge should be -div P = -(\partialPr) / (\partial*r). But according to the book it should be
-div P = -(\partialPr) / (\partial*r) - (Pr) / r .


Could somebody please explain why it should be that way?? thx
That is the divergence in cylindrical coordinates.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hbase/diverg.html#c3
 
Thank you thank you thank you! :!)
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top